Elementary students' views of explanation, argumentation, and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year
Abstract
Science includes more than just concepts and facts, but also encompasses scientific ways of thinking and reasoning. Students' cultural and linguistic backgrounds influence the knowledge they bring to the classroom, which impacts their degree of comfort with scientific practices. Consequently, the goal of this study was to investigate 5th grade students' views of explanation, argument, and evidence across three contexts—what scientists do, what happens in science classrooms, and what happens in everyday life. The study also focused on how students' abilities to engage in one practice, argumentation, changed over the school year. Multiple data sources were analyzed: pre‐ and post‐student interviews, videotapes of classroom instruction, and student writing. The results from the beginning of the school year suggest that students' views of explanation, argument, and evidence, varied across the three contexts with students most likely to respond “I don't know” when talking about their science classroom. Students had resources to draw from both in their everyday knowledge and knowledge of scientists, but were unclear how to use those resources in their science classroom. Students' understandings of explanation, argument, and evidence for scientists and for science class changed over the course of the school year, while their everyday meanings remained more constant. This suggests that instruction can support students in developing stronger understanding of these scientific practices…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
1st graders were able to formulate up to six complete arguments, that is, to link the conclusion and the reasoning in the same statement.
“However, it is particularly interesting that 1st graders were able to formulate up to six complete arguments (sensu McNeill 2011), that is, to link the conclusion and the reasoning in the same statement.”
From Young Children's Epistemic Operations and Emergent Argumentation in Inquiry‐Based Discussions: The Role of Teacher Questioning and Collaborative Interactions (2025) · cites this paper as McNeill 2011
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 63 · Cited by 254
- Authors
- McNeill, K. L.
- Affiliations
- Boston College (US)
- Corresponding author
- McNeill, Katherine L.
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-07-11
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 793-823
- ISSN
- 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2736
- OpenAlex
- W2023001527
- Cited by
- 254
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 75.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Evolution and Science Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Science Education and Perceptions
- Keywords
- scientific argumentation, scientific explanation, scientific evidence, elementary school science, fifth grade students, everyday knowledge, scientific writing, argument structure
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review